missing political perspective or what could Of course this could be viewed as a be interpreted as a romantic plea for a uni- qualified truth, as well as the often out- fied Turkic identity. In 1992 the Turkish spoken doubts from some European po- president of that time, Turgut Özal claimed: litical figures that does not belong We are from the same root, we are a large to Europe. However, in the foreseeable fu- family. If we make no mistakes, the 21st cen- ture the modern of Turkey with tury will be ours. (Pope 2005: 369) its strong Kemalist mindset is a political reality like the ongoing negotiations, even “He who lives will see,” could be a hum- though slow, between Turkey and the EU ble comment on this statement. According on a Turkish membership. It should be a to Samuel P. Huntington in his highly con- rather unquestionable assumption that the troversial and often debated bookThe Clash EU negotiations have been and still are the of Civilisations and the Remaking of World real engine of the political reform process Order (Simon & Schuster UK Ltd, 1997), in Turkey. Turkey, having rejected Mecca and being rejected by Brussels, seized the opportu- During the political and constitutional nity in the early nineties to turn toward crisis in Turkey in 2007-2008 we have may- Tashkent. Turkish leaders including Turgut be been witnessing the first real challenge Özal held out a vision of a community of to the secular establishment in terms of a and particular attention was promising step in consolidating Turkey´s directed to Azerbaijan and the four Turkic fragile and guided democracy. Bearing this speaking Central Asia, Uzbekistan, Turk- in mind, a unified Turkic political identity menistan, Kazakhstan, and Kyrgyzstan. and configuration among Turkic speaking people seems neither realistic, nor urgent. Even with regard to Turkey’s ambition to develop its links with the Turkic former Stefan Höjelid, Växjö University, Sweden Soviet , and by doing so putting the Kemalist secular identity under chal- Endnotes lenge, Huntington’s own conclusion was 1. See the discussions on Turkey in Huntington that Turkey did not meet all the minimum 2002 in chapter 6 on The Cultural Reconfiguration requirements for a thorn country to shift its of Global Politics (The Free Press 2002, as an im- civilizational identity.1 print of Simon & Schuster UK Ltd 1997).

Kemalism in Turkish Politics: The Republican People’s Party, and

By Sinan Ciddi London and New York: Routledge, 2009, 196 pp., ISBN 9780415475044.

The title of this book is a misnomer: the ple Party and Kemalism” for the book aims title should have been “The Republican Peo- to unravel why this leftist political party in

Insight Turkey Vol. 12 / No. 1 / 2010 227 Book Reviews

Turkey has consistently garnered a number the capitalist system to their coming to of votes less than centre-right political par- terms with global and competitive forces, ties have, and this failure is attributed to the and how the RPP has not been able to leave party’s close relationship with Kemalism behind the “Kemalist roadmap” it has ad- rather than with the genuine left. opted all along. The book has an introduction, eight This is a useful book for people trying to chapters, and a conclusion. In chapter one, make heads or tails of the trials and tribula- it is noted that Kemalism has constituted a tions of Turkish politics since the inception road block to the flourishing of leftist poli- of the Republic (1923). It clearly shows how tics as a mainstream political movement in the RPP, which had set up the Republic, in- Turkey. In the following two chapters, it is troduced important Westernizing reforms pointed out that when in the 1970s the Re- (under Mustafa Kemal Atatük), made sig- publican People’s Party (RPP) managed to nificant contributions to ensuring the mili- be successful at the polls it was not due to tary interventions lasted relatively short its propagation of a genuine social demo- periods of time (under Ismet İnönü), and cratic ; it was rather a consequence then tried to distance itself from the centre of clientalism and patronage supported by (under Bülent Ecevit), and how in recent leftist slogans. In chapter four, it is indi- years the RPP as the main opposition has cated that the 1980 military intervention hardly developed socio-economic policies, practically put an end to the left in Turk- let alone policies with a social democratic ish politics, and the introduction of market slant, and how it has instead focused on economics and transformation of Turkish matters of political Islam and ethnic issues voters into a new generation of consum- from radical secularist and ethnic nation- ers in the 1980s added salt to the injury. alist perspectives, respectively (especially In chapters five and six, the author argues under Deniz Baykal). that in post-Cold War Turkey, religiosity On the other hand, it is not possible to and ethnicity have become determinants agree with the author on several points re- of voter preferences, and during this pe- garding the way in which he endeavors to riod, instead of coming up with elector- substantiate his basic argument mentioned ally attractive party programs and looking above. Let me give only a few of such infe- at performance, the RPP has licities. subscribed to “ultra-nationalism” and “ul- tra-secularism”. Chapter seven shows that Some conceptual approaches of the au- the party has been unable to maintain even thor may be problematised. Above, this re- the backing of the Alevis (which have al- viewer has suggested an alternative title for ways appreciated secular politics because of the book, keeping in mind what the author the Sunni threat to them), the trade union tries to do in his book and the meaning he movement, and urban dwellers. In chapter attributes to Kemalism. There are problems eight and the conclusion, the author delin- with Kemalism itself, too, that is, with the eates how social democrats in Europe have manner in which the author (as well as moved from their attempts to undermine some other students of Turkish politics)

228 Insight Turkey Vol. 12 / No. 1 / 2010 Book Reviews

employs this word/concept. First, it is not stitutional Court and the Council of State. often realized that in the 1923-1938 era, the There are no endnotes for the conclusion, so-called ‘Kemalists’ did not use the word although the author did make references. ‘Kemalism’; in fact, there was no reference Some factual statements made are not to that word/concept in the civics books of correct. “Two of the main determinants of 1 the era. Secondly, in the book under re- voting in post-Cold War Turkey” have not view, Atatürk, İnönü, and Recep Peker are been “religiosity and ethnicity” (p. 8). If it all placed in the same basket when it comes was religiosity, the votes of the religiously to Kemalism; however, on some matters oriented political parties in that country these statesmen set for themselves different would not have decreased from time to goals and thus they had somewhat differ- time from 1971 to 2002, and the Felicity ent notions of Kemalism. Thirdly, Atatürk Party, which is more religiously oriented was careful not to turn the principles he than the Justice and Development Party, had formulated into a closed ideology, and would have garnered more votes than the thus he diligently kept his distance from latter in the 2002 and 2003 national elec- any kind of ‘ism’. As the present author has tions. If another main determinant of voting suggested elsewhere, Ataturk’s views, that is in the same period was ethnicity, all of the his world view, were turned into a closed ethnically oriented political parties would ideology by the post-Atatürk intellectual- have cleared the 10% election threshold in 2 bureaucratic elite. all the elections at which they competed, There are some inconsistencies in the which did not turn out to be the case, and reporting of some issues. In regard to the at the 2002 and 2007 national elections, the efforts for the institutionalization of the Justice and Development Party could not Westernized reforms, on the one hand it is have been so successful in the southeast- pointed out that some citizens were “pun- ern region of Turkey as it was. In the wake ished by death sentences and executions of the 1980 military intervention, political dished out by the roaming Independence leaders were not sent off to “remote parts of tribunals” (p. 25) and on the other hand it the country”, but to the same town (p. 69). is noted that “compared with other regimes The Welfare Party’s success at the polls in changes, the Turkish experience was rela- 1994 was due the successful performance of tively bloodless” (p. 28). the municipalities it controlled at the time, There are some critical omissions in the not because the key determinants of vote at narrative offered: The 1960 Constitutional the time were “religiosity and ethnicity” (p. provisions concerning the powers of the 142). Recep Tayyip Erdoğan was impris- National Security Council were amended oned for a speech he had made in Siirt, not so as to increase its powers not only in the in Sivas (p. 180, note 66). post-1980 military intervention period, but Related to the above, at places the au- also in the post-1971 military interven- thor reports some past events as if they still tion period (p. 68). To the state institutions continue. The third paragraph on p. 107 mentioned on p. 145, second paragraph, gives the impression to the uninitiated that the author should also have added the Con- Ecevit is still the chairman of the Demo-

Insight Turkey Vol. 12 / No. 1 / 2010 229 Book Reviews

cratic Left Party; Ecevit left that party in thus the American spelling of the word in 2002 and died in 2006. One comes across question had been used. to a similar situation on p. 108, third para- Despite these reservations, as already graph. noted, the book under review is a very There are also some simple mistakes: useful addition to the literature on Turk- “Fetullah Gülen” should have been spelled ish politics. It is recommended to both the as “Fethullah Gülen” (p. 101). “[M]uassır uninitiated and the long-time student of medeniyet” should have been translated Turkish politics. as “contemporary civilisation”, not as “ad- Metin Heper, Bilkent University vanced civilisation” (p. 103). The author should not have referred to all leftists in Endnotes Turkey as socialists (p. 131). 1. Türker Alkan, “Turkey: Rise and Decline of Finally, a matter of style: one should re- Legitimacy in a Revolutionary Regime”, Journal of main faithful to the original spelling when Southeastern and Middle Eastern Studies, 4 (1980): quoting or giving a reference; thus, one 37-48. 2. Metin Heper, “‘Political Modernization as should not change “Behavior” to “Behav- Reflected in Bureaucratic Change: The Turkish Bu- iour”, as the author does on p. 180, note 58. reaucracy and a ‘Historical Bureaucratic Empire’ The journal there is an American journal, Tradition”, 7, no. 4 (1976): 507-521.

The Museum of Innocence

By Orhan Pamuk, translated by Maureen Freely New York, Alfred A. Knopf, 2009, 536 pp., ISBN 9780676979687.

One of the most distinctive things about ries and the City—many more of his loyal Orhan Pamuk’s writing is the playful way he readers have been drawn in. Not only have tantalizes his readers by constantly blurring his parents, his brother, his grandmother, the boundaries between truth and fiction. and even the family servants become famil- By having his first-person narrators include iar figures, but fictional characters from his many well-known aspects of the novelist’s early novels, such as the wealthy merchant own life in their tales, he keeps us guessing Cevdet Bey and the newspaper columnist about which parts of the story actually hap- Celal Salik turn up with such regularity in pened and which are imaginary. When he later works that they have come to seem published his first few novels, only people equally real. With The Museum of Inno- who were personally acquainted with the cence Pamuk has taken this game to an- author or his family could participate in other level. The cover of the novel features this guessing game. As he has become in- a photo of four people parked beside the creasingly famous—and especially since the Bosphorus in a 1956 Chevrolet just like the publication of his memoir Istanbul: Memo- one described in the novel as belonging to

230 Insight Turkey Vol. 12 / No. 1 / 2010